Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Of course, we _could_ update the test_atom to do something magic
> only when the 'contents' atom is being asked. We notice that $2 is
> 'contents', do the usual test_expect_success for 'contents', and
> then measure the byte length of $3 ourselves and test
> 'contents:size'. That way, all the above test updates would become
> unnecessary (and the last two hunks of this patch can also go).
>
> That approach may even allow you to hide the details of sanitize-pgp
> in the updated test_atom so that the actual tests may not have to get
> updated even for signed tags.
After seeing the "wc -c" portability issues, I am now even more
inclined to say that the above is the right direction. The
portability worries can and should be encapsulated in a single
test_atom helper function, just as it can be used to hide the
differences between signed tags, annotated tags and commits.
Thanks.
>> +# We cannot use test_atom to check contents:size of signed tags due to sanitize_pgp
>> +test_tag_contents_size_pgp () {
>> + ref="$1"
>> + test_expect_success $PREREQ "basic atom: $ref contents:size" "
>> + git cat-file tag $ref | tail -n +6 | wc -c >expected &&
>> + git for-each-ref --format='%(contents:size)' $ref >actual &&
>> + test_cmp expected actual
>> + "
>> +}
